The defendant is charged [in count __]
with criminal mischief in the first degree. The statute defining this offense
reads in pertinent part as follows:

a person is guilty of criminal
mischief in the first degree when with intent to cause an interruption or
impairment of service rendered to the public and having no reasonable ground to
believe that such person has a right to do so, such person damages or tampers
with <insert as appropriate:>

any tangible
property owned by the state, a municipality or a person for fire alarm or police
alarm purposes.

any
telecommunication system operated by the state police or a municipal police
department.

any emergency
medical or fire service dispatching system.

any fire
suppression equipment owned by the state, a municipality, a person or a fire
district.

any fire hydrant or
hydrant system owned by the state or a municipality, a person, fire district or
private water company.

For you to find the defendant guilty
of this charge, the state must prove the following elements beyond a reasonable
doubt:

Element 1 - Damaged or tampered
with propertyThe first element is that the
defendant damaged or tampered with <insert as appropriate:>

tangible property
owned by the state, a municipality or a person for fire alarm or police alarm
purposes.

a telecommunication
system operated by the state police or a municipal police department.

an emergency
medical or fire service dispatching system.

fire suppression
equipment owned by the state, a municipality, a person or a fire district.

a fire hydrant or
hydrant system owned by the state or a municipality, a person, fire district or
private water company.

To "damage" means to cause harm to the
property. To "tamper with" means to physically interfere with.

Element 2 - IntentThe second element is that the
defendant intended to cause an interruption or impairment of service rendered to
the public. A person acts "intentionally"
with respect to a result when (his/her) conscious objective is to cause such
result. <See
Intent: Specific, Instruction 2.3-1.>

Element 3 - No rightThe third element is that the
defendant had no reasonable ground to believe that (he/she) had a right to
damage or tamper with the property. A "reasonable ground to believe" means that
a reasonable person in the defendant's situation, viewing the circumstances from
the defendant's point of view, would have shared that belief.

Conclusion

In summary, the state must prove
beyond a reasonable doubt that 1) the defendant damaged or tampered with <identify
property>, 2) (he/she) intended to cause interruption or impairment of
service rendered to the public, and 3) (he/she) had no reasonable ground to
believe that (he/she) had a right to damage or tamper with the property.

If you unanimously find that the state
has proved beyond a reasonable doubt each of the elements of the crime of
criminal mischief in the first degree, then you shall find the defendant
guilty. On the other hand, if you unanimously find that the state has failed to
prove beyond a reasonable doubt any of the elements, you shall then find the
defendant not guilty.